Why the US Navy Is Going to Be Destroyed in the Next Global War

| |

White Gold - This Element Will Power Every Home In America

aircraft carrier

As the Naval forces of the United States and China continue to play tit for tat in the South China Sea, we have to consider the possible results of these maneuvers. There are at least two sides to every war, and obviously, only one can be the winner. In this case however, both sides clearly think they can win, or else they wouldn’t be challenging each other on the open seas.

Most people would probably assume that China’s navy would be no match for America’s high-tech war machine, but there are a few experts who would beg to differ. According to a recent report from a defense think tank, our aircraft carriers, the most crucial and expensive cornerstone of America’s conventional military, may be its weakest link.

The Pentagon’s focus on developing a “jack of all trades, master of none” aircraft, while rival countries build technology capable of sinking American carriers, could make these expensive warships ineffective in the coming years, according to the naval expert who authored the report.

The rise of new powers now threatens to push the Navy farther from shore and beyond the range of the aircraft the carriers hold, according to the report written by naval expert Jerry Hendrix of the Center for New American Security. “This push back would limit the service’s ability to project power and thus undermine the credibility of the United States.”

The U.S. carrier fleet and its air wings, or the aircraft on board, have been considered the foundation of American naval power since the end of World War II.

Over the last 70 years, the Pentagon has expanded and upgraded its fleet of aircraft carriers and the planes they carry; the staggering sums involved — each carrier costs roughly $12 billion — has been an investment that has allowed the U.S. Navy to project a consistent, military presence across the globe.

But the report charges that a misguided decision over the past 20 years to prioritize short-range, light attack aircraft — rather than those with deep-strike capabilities and longer range — coupled with the development of new, anti-ship missile technology by several unfriendly nations, jeopardizes the safety of the American vessels.

The report argues that since the US Navy hasn’t squared off against any opposing naval force in over 70 years, they’ve grown complacent to the realities of modern warfare. On the other hand, simply changing the aircraft that we use might not be enough. Those aforementioned anti-ship missiles are probably more than capable of completely obliterating our ships, regardless of what kind of aircraft they carry.

Countries like China and Russia have put a ton of research into anti-ship missile technology, because they provide the most bang for their buck. They know that they can’t outspend our military and build a bunch of aircraft carriers, so these missiles have long been the perfect solution to America’s military prowess. It only takes one or two of them to sink a ship, and you can manufacture thousands of them for the cost of a single aircraft carrier.

While it’s hard to say for sure what would happen if our ships ever encountered these missiles, most would argue that our navy’s defense systems could easily counter them, including the most modern and advanced missiles. That’s a reasonable assessment, but again, these missiles are relatively cheap and nations like China can manufacture thousands of them. Our ships will be able to counter two or three of them, but if dozens or even hundreds of them are launched all at once, they could easily put our navy at the bottom of the ocean.

In other words, our navy has a much bigger problem. Just as the aircraft carrier made the battleship largely obsolete after World War Two, the anti-ship missile has made the aircraft carrier obsolete for conventional warfare. Couple that with the fact that both Russia and China have submarines that are so stealthy our ships can’t really detect them, and you’ve got a recipe for total and utter defeat if our nation ever goes to war with these countries.

And honestly, powerful nations like China and Russia aren’t the only major threats to our navy. When we tried to run a simulated wargame in the Persian Gulf back in 2002, the opposition force (which represented Iran) was able to completely destroy our Navy with a few unconventional tactics. Aside from our dismal quagmire in Iraq, that wargame was probably the single biggest reason why the Bush regime never got around to invading Iran. They knew it would have been suicide.

I don’t think anybody doubts that our navy is the most formidable in the world, and that includes Russia and China. However, the war hawks in Washington need to be reminded that our military is far from invincible. Unfortunately, it’s a lesson they’ve forgotten countless times before.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Joshua Krause of The Daily Sheeple.

Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger .

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • Nexusfast123

    As I understand the radars like Aegis are not hardened. The Russians and Chinese perfected EMP weapons ages ago.

    The US military is structured around the tactics of the last war. Carriers only intimidate small defenseless nations.

    Anyone claiming to be able to shoot down a Mach 2.5 to 3.0 missile is deluded (Mach 2.5 is 1,900mph…a rifle bullet is around 800mph).

    • bill lopez

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close-in_weapon_system

      Not really an issue. Its pretty obviously have no idea what you are talking about.

      • Helluva3ngineer

        Bill built one in his garage.

      • patrickkell

        Bill you really should read the full page and look at the comments at the bottom. These would not be able to engage multiple targets at the same time.

        • Razedbywolvs

          He did read that. Nexusfast123 missed that part of the articular “That’s a reasonable assessment, but again, these missiles are relatively cheap and nations like China can manufacture thousands of them.” and said “Anyone claiming to be able to shoot down a Mach 2.5 to 3.0 missile is deluded”

      • Nexusfast123

        Actually I do. The article you point to validates. Aside from the inability to re-target against multiple incoming missiles these systems work on a point-to-point software tracking algorithm as I understand. This assumes the target is straight and steady. Modern missiles are designed to pitch and dip near the target.

        Remember that they try to prove they can shoot them down in ideal and controlled conditions and only one incoming.

    • HappyMoosePicture

      The US gub only fights ‘small defenseless nations’.

      Good comment

    • archer

      The older Russian sunburn missile was tough enough to kill, but they have much improved faster ones that fly lower.

    • freewheelinfranklin543

      A .30-06 150 grain rifle bullet moving at 2800fps is 1909.091 miles per hour. And yes a bullet or a ballistic warhead moving at 17,000 miles per hour can be shot down. But not by the US.
      You didn’t do to well in math class did you!

  • http://home-jobs-reports.biz/ Patricia J. McDonald

    I have made $ 7854 pe r m0nth. I’m finally getting 97 Dollars p/h,….It’s time to take some action and you can join it too.It is simple,dedicated and easy way to get rich.Three weeks from now you will wish you have started today….

    ===>>> See web Address in my Profile

    237

  • paulgilpin
    • archer

      I’ve heard that repeated several times, I know nothing of these systems, but even your car has circuit breakers like your home. To shut down everything don’t seem plausible. Say for instance the phased array radar took a hit and was completely destroyed, I would not think that would render everything else on board inoperative including engines and steering. Just my thoughts though. Were they trying to scam the Russians?

      • paulgilpin

        i have no personal knowledge of this event, but the story is sure making the rounds on the internet………..
        if this event even occurred, i don’t think the article meant to say the ship “came dead in the water”. i read it as the aegis system went down and the ship couldn’t defend itself. the article did say the ship proceeded to a port after the incident.
        the only thing i was thinking is maybe the rooskies have figured a way to plant a “stuxnet” in the aegis system, when the system acquires the target?????

    • masterblaster

      And they did it twice the russian plane turned and came back for a second pulse. The US destroyer was dead in the water defenseless. When it returned to its mediterranean port 27 ship officers resigned and paid for their own flights back to the USA. This is not Bullshit its fact and we never hear any follow up on this incident off the Crimean coast

  • StevetheHun

    This article misses the point. Today, carriers are what Battleships were in WW II… expensive targets but useless assets.

    Carriers are pawns in a nuclear war; entire battle groups will be moved about just to be sacrificed.

    This is propaganda for the Chinese, this admitting carriers are weak. They’re trying to bait the Chinese into a war. My only question is, is our government planning on winning this war, or losing it? My best hypothesis is, they’re planning on losing it.

    • Someguy

      You mean TPTB are planning on the US losing the war.

      • StevetheHun

        Yeah. We’re on the slate to go from 400 million people to a population of 60 million by 2025. Other western countries take a hit, but we’re wiped out.

        Here’s the evidence:
        http://www.deagel.com/country/United-States-of-America_c0001.aspx

        Fun huh?

        It’s just a website, but why? To get hits? Part of the Elite’s fetish to say what they’re going to do to us before they do it? Is it a false information site, intended to throw others off the track? I don’t know. All interesting hypotheses.

        The data suggests that there will be a brief nuclear exchange, and then the US stands down and takes an all out Chinese/Russian nuclear strike.

        • SovereignPatriot88

          60 million people is an awful lot of survivors for an all out nuclear exchange with Russia and China. It would only take a few to kill 250 million people. Or one or two if they were placed just right.

          • StevetheHun

            If you assume the single goal of Russia is to kill Americans and not to take out our nuke capability and that there is no Mexican invasion into the lands of a burnt out U.S., I’d agree.

            I don’t think we can assume that.

          • SovereignPatriot88

            Your right, I was making an assumption that the goal was maximum carnage. When you said all out nuclear exchange, I just pictured hundreds of nukes raining down onto the country. And I can’t see there being very many survivors of that.
            But from a tactical standpoint, and if they were just trying to knock out our ability to retaliate, that would require fewer nukes, and there would be a lot more survivors of that. And there is definitely a likelihood of an invasion, especially if America is as weakened as I think they would be after such an attack.
            Though there won’t be any of the freebies that they are used to. 😉

          • Helluva3ngineer

            If you turned off the lights for 6 months you would hit that number easily.

          • SovereignPatriot88

            They could just set off one or two and trigger an EMP and then sit back and wait for us to kill each other, die of starvation, disease, etc. Depending on how well we are prepared for it, they will definitely kill at least 75 – 85% of us within a year. And they wouldn’t even have to do anything after. Just wait and then invade. Or just walk in, it wouldn’t be much of an invasion at that point.

          • tayronachan

            I think if we are EMPed, we’d retaliate with assets we have at sea or overseas. Those that EMPed us wouldn’t have enough troops left over to invade. And the survivors here would be armed to the teeth. imho, lose, lose all around.

          • SovereignPatriot88

            Very possible. But it depends on their strategy. They may send us an EMP and simultaneously hit our major Naval ships with missiles and leave us in quite the pickle. This is assuming that it’s a nation with the resources to pull it off, or more than one nation. And it also assumes that we don’t do it to ourselves as a false flag attack.
            But even then we would be armed and whatever the plans were for those who pulled off the false flag would be thwarted by an armed rebellion.

          • sunshine

            True. Think of all the people on medication, in hospitals, etc, just for starters. Then the obese people, the unhealthy ones, that’s probably a significant percentage of this nation. There’s a book about this, called “One Second After” and it’s pretty grim.

    • BigGaySteve

      More to the point affirmative action is a bigger problem than carriers.

  • Jim

    No amount of stealthy technology is going to ‘hide’ an aircraft carrier, especially if the bad guys launch a swarm attack.

    • Razedbywolvs

      They build and tested operated the first stealth destroyer out of San Fransisco harbour. The public didn’t catch on for 5 years.

  • chris

    MIC build up coming buy “defense” stocks/

  • Eric Blake

    Time to reopen the SSN 21 Class mold .. The US has three SSN 21 class submarines … having been on one… I know for a fact these things are naval killers. Designed to sink an entire Russian battle group by itself, one Seawolf Class submarine can really put a hurtin on any navy… No aircraft carrier required.

    • Brian

      The US Sub’s are probably our biggest asset. Carriers are giant turkeys. The new Virginia subs are probably well suited against other surface fleets. It is those damn diesel boats that are the real danger to us. Quiet and hard to find.

      • archer

        Not to worry, our Israeli friends have at least 6, they’ll protect us. NOT

  • Helluva3ngineer

    I’m no expert but it sure seems that cruise missile technology and kinetic weapons will make these ships very expensive targets.

  • Todd Phil

    Hillary Clinton has half of America she calls her enemy too. Who will strike first?

    • paulgilpin

      half?????

    • TripWire

      What does it matter!#@$^

      Hillary for president, IN SOMALIA !!!

  • breakawaymotorsports .

    China can’t even make a decent wheel bearing for a car..never mind anything more complex!! All China has are a lot of soldiers. Period.

    • SovereignPatriot88

      LMFAO, ain’t that the truth! Half of the shit from China is broken in the shipping container before it even gets to the store. Struts are just as bad. An OE strut will last for years. Once you put those cheap Chinese struts on your car, they will need to be replaced once a year after that. And that’s after you’ve changed it 3 or 4 times to weed out the bad ones. You almost have to go to the dealer for those.
      Their biggest threat is lots of people. They could probably come up with 30 million troops if they needed to. Arming them would be expensive. So they would likely have the cheapest guns money can buy. Something like the Sten sub machine gun. It’s a pipe with a spring and a big brass bolt. Fires 9mm from a 30 round magazine. At the time, they cost about $5 each to make. They looked like the grease guns.

  • Gearmoe

    China can make high or low quality, they successfully send rockets to space. They also make cheap crap. Advice, don’t go to war with China.

    • sunshine

      Good point…when you look back at history and see another country with a large army (Russia) they never had the capabilities to manufacture the weapons, etc that they needed to win any war. China is different, it is the manufacturing center of the world…their only real issue might be food production. But maybe not, since they’re in Africa. Scary stuff…

  • bsroon

    Right, Nex – first thought – the idiots are AGAIN fighting the last war.

  • Johncanshoot

    Much of our military equipment is worn-out. No new systems have been brought on line since Obama took office… he has decimated the numbers of military replacement vehicles and ships that are necessary to replace our worn-out aging assets. The Raptor is not much better if better at all than existing new Russian and Chinese air craft and the F35 seems to be a bust. Stealth technology that we have been depending so much on is actually not nearly as affective as our people have thought. China and Russia have made great progress in improving and expanding their militaries while Obama has cut our carrier based fleets from 11 to four or five. The assumption has been that the asymmetrical warfare of the last 30 or so years will be the norm for the future so our STRATEGIC forces have suffered since the cold war. Obama has purged the military of many of our best, most capable patriotic officers. Historically no military has performed well immediately after such a purge… it takes years to replace such officers and bring them up to speed. Obama is reducing our military to its smallest force numbers since WWII while ALL our potential adversaries have increased the size and effectiveness of their armies, air forces, and navies. Thanks to Obama’s unexplainable foreign policy America has not a single significant ally other than Israel. No more help from Europe can be expected. Our potential advasaries are many, not just China. China will not attack the United States without back-up. Potential enemies that might join China in attacking America strategically or regionally: Russia, Korea, Iran, the Islamic world… maybe even Pakistan and Turkey. Perhaps even Cuba would join-in. Obama has reduced our military power but also our manufacturing capability which won WWII for the United States, THE HOME FRONT. Even agriculture is threatened by Obama. Food production, manufacturing, and domestic petroleum production are the very basis of our strategic power BUT OBAMA has been trying his best to “compromise” all three. Unbelievably we buy many of our military’s replacement parts from China such as ejection seat parts. Our open borders and the Muslims that Obama has been importing has brought a million or two potentual terrorists into the country to raise havoc here at home. Further our society, especially our industry and even much of the military is extremely vulnerable to EMF attacks from which the United States is woefully unprepared to defend against or to survive. An EMF attack could be launched by Korea, Muslim terrorists, China, Russia, and soon Iran. If an EMF attack does cripple our electrical grid there will be riots in most cities as food supplies vanish from the shelves of stores… Among my biggest concerns is the proven ability of China to selectively take out our satellites and disable our most advanced electronic systems such as on board our most effective and important surface vessels. Since OBAMA has been PREZ he has systemically destroyed this countries ability to project strategic force and influence that had been put in place by previous Republican Presidents… even our INTEL ability has been compromised from what President GW Bush developed. While President Bill Clinton sold our most advanced and secret communications technology to the Communist Chinese for some reason so most experts are certain that they will be able to intercept our battlefield, theater, and strategic communications. I think your article is very well done and accurate, BUT you did not go far enough, my opinion. Please keep-up the good work, best wishes. PS: I sure wish I could figure-out a place to hide during the next year or so…